Schools
Primary and secondary education
Based on 21 parliamentary votes
Related Education Issues
How Parties Voted on Schools
Government alignment shows how often each party voted with the government's stated position. Issue-aligned direction shows agreement with the AI-identified supportive stance.
Voted with government positionVoted in issue-aligned direction
Recent Votes
| Vote | Result | Date |
|---|---|---|
MPs voted on whether to accept or reject a change made by the House of Lords to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Without debate excerpts, the precise content of Lords Amendment 102 cannot be determined, but the vote decided whether the Commons would override that Lords change. Yes = Support the government's position of rejecting or disagreeing with Lords Amendment 102 to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill · No = Support retaining Lords Amendment 102, opposing the government's attempt to remove or replace it Govt: Aye | 261-138 | 15 Apr 2026 |
MPs voted on whether to reject a change made by the House of Lords to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Without debate excerpts, the precise content of Lords Amendment 41B is unknown, but the government (Labour) sought to overturn this Lords change and restore its original position. Yes = Support the government's decision to reject Lords Amendment 41B and restore the Commons' original position on this clause of the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill · No = Support retaining the Lords' amendment 41B, opposing the government's attempt to override the change made by the upper chamber Govt: Aye | 255-146 | 15 Apr 2026 |
MPs voted on whether to accept or reject a change made by the House of Lords to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Without debate excerpts, the specific content of Lords Amendment 106 cannot be determined, but the vote represents the Commons deciding whether to keep or overturn a Lords modification to this wide-ranging children's legislation. Yes = Support the government's position to disagree with Lords Amendment 106, effectively rejecting the Lords' change to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill · No = Support retaining Lords Amendment 106, backing the change the unelected chamber made to the Bill Govt: Aye | 248-146 | 15 Apr 2026 |
MPs voted on whether to accept or reject a change made by the House of Lords to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Without debate excerpts, the specific content of Lords Amendment 38 cannot be determined, but the vote decided whether the Commons would override the Lords' modification to this legislation covering children's welfare and schools. Yes = Support the government's position of rejecting Lords Amendment 38, restoring the original Commons text of the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill · No = Support retaining Lords Amendment 38, backing the change made by the House of Lords to the Bill Govt: Aye | 258-152 | 15 Apr 2026 |
MPs voted on whether to reject a Lords amendment (44) that would have required parental consent before families could be referred to or kept on a child protection support programme. The government argued this requirement would deter vulnerable families from seeking help; opponents, citing cases like Sara Sharif, argued the Lords change would have better protected children at risk. Yes = Support the government's rejection of the Lords amendment, keeping the existing approach where families can be referred to support programmes without a new consent requirement · No = Back the Lords amendment requiring parental consent for referrals to child protection support, arguing this would better safeguard children like Sara Sharif Govt: Aye | 315-110 | 9 Mar 2026 |
The Commons voted on whether to reject a Lords amendment (106) that would have put a statutory ban on mobile phones in schools into law. The government argued its strengthened guidance already ensures schools are mobile phone-free 'bell to bell' and that legislation is unnecessary, while the Lords wanted a formal legal requirement. Yes = Support the government's position that strengthened guidance is sufficient to enforce mobile phone bans in schools, rejecting a statutory requirement added by the Lords · No = Support the Lords amendment to enshrine a mobile phone ban in schools in law, rather than relying on government guidance Govt: Aye | 305-178 | 9 Mar 2026 |
The government voted to reject a Lords amendment that would have required a review of funding levels for the Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund, which provides financial help for adoptive and special guardian families. The government argued it had already committed £55 million for 2026-27 and confirmed the fund's continuation, making a formal review unnecessary. Yes = Support the government's rejection of a mandatory funding review for the Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund, trusting existing ministerial commitments are sufficient · No = Back the Lords amendment requiring a formal review of funding for adoptive and special guardian families, arguing greater scrutiny and accountability is needed Govt: Aye | 310-183 | 9 Mar 2026 |
The Commons voted to reject a Lords amendment (Amendment 17) to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Based on the debate, Lords Amendment 17 related to sibling relationships for looked-after children, but the government argued it would do little to advance that cause, preferring instead to address the issue through broader children's social care reforms. Yes = Support the government's rejection of the Lords amendment on sibling relationships for looked-after children, trusting that wider social care reforms will better address the issue · No = Support the Lords amendment to strengthen protections for sibling relationships among looked-after children, disagreeing that existing or planned reforms are sufficient Govt: Aye | 308-181 | 9 Mar 2026 |
The government voted to reject a Lords amendment that would have banned children under 16 from accessing social media. The Lords had added this measure to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, but the government disagreed with it, proposing instead to deal with online harms through alternative means. Yes = Support the government's position of rejecting the Lords' proposed under-16 social media ban, preferring alternative regulatory approaches rather than an outright ban · No = Support the Lords amendment to ban under-16s from social media, arguing this is necessary to protect children from harmful algorithms and content Govt: Aye | 309-174 | 9 Mar 2026 |
The Lords had amended the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill to prevent the government from reducing pupil admission numbers at oversubscribed good and outstanding schools. The Commons voted to reject this Lords amendment, meaning the government retains the power to limit how many pupils these schools can take, overriding the Lords' attempt to protect parental choice and high-performing schools. Yes = Support the government's power to reduce pupil admission numbers at oversubscribed good and outstanding schools, rejecting the Lords' protection of parental choice · No = Oppose restricting good and outstanding schools from admitting more pupils, arguing parental choice drives school improvement and popular schools should be allowed to grow Govt: Aye | 317-163 | 9 Mar 2026 |
How is this calculated?
Government alignment (primary bar) shows how often a party's MPs voted with the government's stated position on this issue. This is the most comparable metric across parties, as it measures the same reference point for everyone.
Issue-aligned direction (secondary bar) shows how often MPs voted in the direction tagged as supportive of this issue by AI analysis. For example, if a vote is tagged “pro-environment”, a Yes vote counts as aligned. This can be misleading when the tagged direction happens to align with opposition amendments rather than government bills.
Why these metrics may differ: Opposition parties often vote against government bills for strategic or procedural reasons, even when they broadly support the policy area. The government alignment metric makes this clearer by showing the actual voting pattern against a consistent reference.
Source: Commons division data from the UK Parliament Votes API. Alignment direction determined by AI analysis of vote stance tags. Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.